The merriment of devils and the anger of the saints – the NIV saga continues

Would you like to rewrite the Moslem Koran?  Perhaps add a couple of modifying words to reflect our own views.  Maybe strengthen the bits about “protecting” non-Moslems, and, when it talks about holy war against unbelievers, add an adjective or two to make sure this is “spiritual” war?

Or maybe we could work over the Jewish bible!  Hey, if we hate the Israelis, we could “clarify” for them that the bits giving Israel the land are provisional, or “spiritual”, or something.  Or if we’re Zionistically inclined, we could make sure that all Jews know what their duty in occupying the land of Israel is. 

Would you instead prefer Barack Obama to make some “clarifications” to the bible, to reflect his political programme?  Or Tony Blair?  Or Margaret Thatcher?

Of course this is a policy that you wouldn’t do to any holy book in which you believed yourself!  If you believed that the Koran was from Allah, you’d hesitate pretty hard before mucking with it, whatever spin you put on your changes.  After all, Allah might throw you into hell.  He might get his people to kill you.  You believe in all this stuff, so it wouldn’t be good.

No, it’s something you’d do to someone else’s holy book.  You’d do it to them.  Make their book reflect your views.  And wouldn’t it be fun to do!  It would certainly show who’s boss — you — and that their god was powerless.  If you could do it to the Koran, and make the Moslems take your changed version and bow down to it, you could laugh every time you heard a minaret.  They’d be bowing down to you.

Of course this is satire.  No sensible person would want to abuse another in this manner.  You’d have to be quite a bigot to do this.

Unfortunately we live in an age beyond satire.  Juvenal remarked, “What can you do, when the man himself is more vile than anything you can think of to say about him?”  And this programme is being put into effect today. 

There is a new version out of the New International Version English translation of the bible.  Apparently, the old version has been withdrawn; if you want the NIV, you must take the new one.  The web sites have been changed.  The decision has been made.

So why is this being changed?  What are the changes?  Well, you will look on the NIV website in vain.  You will find, under the “FAQ” only words about the unspecified changes to the English language — although I must have missed these, because I don’t know of such changes in formal English.

Most translations of the bible achieve little.  But when the NIV appeared it succeeded.  It took hold in the Christian community.  It was trusted.

Ten years ago an attempt was made to corrupt it.  The text was rewritten to reflect the teachings of the contemporary political belief-system often called Political Correctness.  (Its advocates have never named their philosophy, since once you can name something you can oppose it.)   As we all know, among the principles of that ideology is a demand to remove from literature references to ‘man’ (equivalent to Latin homo, man as species) and replace them with ‘man and woman’ (Latin vir and femina).  As part of this dogma, they specify that God — these people are atheists — may not be referred to as male.  This creed has never been put to a vote and is instead advanced by the methods of backstairs politics.  This teaching is the faith of the establishment in our day, and most weeks I see some newspaper report of some poor soul who has fallen foul of its ever-shifting dogmas and lost their job.  Its proponents are not Christians, although some Christians are politically correct.

Anyway the corrupt version was issued; and US Christians resisted, for which we may be truly thankful.   Wayne Grudem listed a series of mistranslations, all designed to rewrite the bible into what — in the opinion of the PC — it should have said.  Sales of the NIV collapsed.  In a desperate attempt to remedy the situation, the old NIV was brought back and the new one renamed the TNIV.   The TNIV was a commercial failure, and failed to achieve the end of those who composed it.  Christians rejected it.  A few ministers conspicuously endorsed it, thereby indicating something about them to the rest of us. 

Corrupting the bible is a sin.  The ending of Revelation indicates as much.   The very idea of translating the bible according to the principles of some politically powerful contemporary ideology ought to horrify any Christian.  Do we follow Christ, or Caesar? 

It is easy enough to see the problem if we happen to disagree with that ideology!  Oh yes.  That isn’t a problem.  But we can kid ourselves, if we happen to agree with some potent contemporary ideology, and suppose that God must endorse it.  The classic example is “church and king” Toryism; but nevertheless, it is wrong and blasphemous to call Caesar our god and to bow before him. 

What worried me is that there was no repentance from those responsible, no acknowledgement of what an awful thing had been attempted.  As far as I know no-one was sacked.  The attitude I see is that the TNIV “failed to be accepted”, not “was wrong”.  Those who perpetrated this evil remained at their desks, to the best of my knowledge.  Today we see the fruit of their labours, in a new version.

So what is happening?  Is this an honest revision?  Or is it merely a case that the heretics, having failed to get their dogma written into the bible in one gulp, have decided to make the church eat this elephant a little at a time?  We all know how people get unpopular policies accepted; they do it one small step at a time.  Those of us enduring metrication in the UK can see this happening under our noses, undiscussed, low-visibility.  Is this the same, I ask?

A certain amount of textual corrections based on revisions to the Greek text are also included, which might otherwise be unobjectionable.   But I wonder whether it is desirable to keep revising a translation?  Each time we revise the translation, do we not give the impression that the Word of God is a moveable feast?  Textual critics fiddle endlessly, but their conclusions are never settled and may be reversed when times change.  Atheists jeer that the bible is not the Word of God because it keeps changing.  By contrast the NIV people give the impression to me of thinking in terms of an endless series of changes.

So I shan’t be purchasing this “new bible”.  The old one is fine, thanks.  I don’t need someone else’s idea of what the bible should say.  And … I hope the Lord punishes these people very severely indeed, if this is what is happening.  This is not a game.  This is the Word of Life, the only means of Salvation in a dying world.  And some creep wants to make it reflect the opinions of the Selfish Generation?

A set of lay comparisons is here.  It doesn’t look good to me, but who knows?

Share

Copyright claim on all images of Stonehenge ever

An amusing example of bureaucratic hubris has reached me.  A post here on the fotoLibra blog — a commercial picture library — reveals an email from English Heritage, claiming copyright on all images ever made of Stonehenge.

We are sending you an email regarding images of Stonehenge in your fotoLibra website. Please be aware that any images of Stonehenge can not be used for any commercial interest, all commercial interest to sell images must be directed to English Heritage.

Legally it’s nonsense, of course.  The copyright in images resides always with the photographer, not the ‘owner’ of the site, unless those rights are explicitly transferred.  Just owning something that people photograph gives you no rights (British Library take note please).

But it does show the attitude — it’s all about exploitation, as much as can be achieved.   Not a very good sign, for a world heritage site whose every penny comes from public funds.

For those unfamiliar with it, English Heritage is a quango — an organisation set up and funded by the UK government, but with establishment appointees who are then allowed to run it as they please without government interference. 

UPDATE:  I have just had to delete an abusive comment on this post. I can only suppose from its content is by an EH employee; because I can’t imagine anyone else would care enough about EH to insult me over this.  Nasty people, if so.

Share

Byzantine automata – the emperor is on the throne!

Hero of Alexandria devised various water-powered machines in antiquity.  But one of the ways in which the Byzantine emperor impressed the barbarians was the presence of automata at his court.  Mechanical marvels were part of their arsenal of influence.

One account records that the emperor had a throne which could whisk him up towards the ceiling.  It doesn’t sound all that safe, actually.  Byzantine robes could be voluminous, and I wonder whether any emperor ever fell off!  Did the imperial throne have a seat-belt, I ask?

I thought I would see what I could find on these by a google search.  I found few primary sources.  One page told me that one of the artificers was Leo the Mathematician (790-870), although I could find no details.

Another book was more detailed.  Constantine Porphyrogenitus (913-54) in his Book of ceremonies apparently mentions three automata related to the “throne of Solomon”.  These include trees with singing birds, roaring lions, and moving beasts.  Liudprand of Cremona in his memoirs of his trip to Constantinople in 949 tells us [1]:

In front of the emperor’s throne was set up a tree of gilded bronze, its branches filled with birds, likewise made of bronze gilded over, and these emitted cries appropriate to their species.  Now the emperor’s throne was made in such a cunning manner that at one moment it was down on the ground, while at another it rose higher and was to be seen up in the air.  This throne was of immense size and was, as it were, guarded by lions, made either of bronze or wood covered with gold, which struck the ground with their tails and roared with open mouth and quivering tongue.  Leaning on the shoulders of two eunuchs, I was brought into the emperor’s presence.  As I came up the lions began to roar and the birds to twitter, each according to its kind, but I was moved neither by fear nor astonishment … After I had done obeisance to the Emperor by prostrating myself three times, I lifted my head, and behold! the man whom I had just seen sitting at a moderate height from the ground had now changed his vestments and was sitting as high as the ceiling of the hall.  I could not think how this was done, unless perhaps he was lifted up by some such machine as is used for raising the timbers of a wine press.[2]

Theophanes Continuatus tells us in the Vita Michaelis 21 (Bonn ed., 1838, p.173, ll.6-10), that the emperor Theophilus (829-842) had automata, which his successor Michael III (842-867) destroyed.  Other chroniclers also mention these, apparently.[3]

[1] G. Brett, The automata in the Byzantine ‘Throne of Solomon’, Speculum 29 (1954), 477-87, via this link.
[2] J.Becker, Antapodosis (Hannover-Leipzig, 1915), 6,5, tr. Mango, Art of the Byzantine Empire, 209-10.
[3] Bibliography in Littlewood, Gardens of the palaces, p.32, n.139.

Share

From my diary

It’s all a bit boring here at the moment.  I can’t pay any attention to antiquity because of the pressure of other dull but necessary things.  The days are short, the evenings dark, and all that jazz.

I don’t know how interesting people find the details of producing the Eusebius volume.  All the proof corrections are in, and I now need to spend some serious time processing them into the PDF so they can be sent to the typesetter. 

The bureaucracy with getting an “account” set up at print-on-demand firm Lightning Source grinds on — amusingly they demand an annual fee to do business with you, but I don’t think there is more for me to do.  But ad-hoc printing is not their thing.  I’ve had to do the proof copies via Lulu.

The cover design that I want is now in my mind, and will consist of a dark green cloth covered hardback with gold lettering; author, title, and, lower down, publisher logo.  The logo design people, Add Design of Leiston, have sent me some possible logos today, and they all look good and possible.  I’ve not told them yet, but the chances are good that they will be doing the cover setup and the website as well.

I’ve decided that the Syriac text needs to be reset in a larger font — it’s just too tiny as it stands, and I think this is partly the fault of the Meltho fonts themselves, which seem smaller than usual. 

On a different note someone asked me if I had a PDF of a manuscript of al-Makin.  I hunted around last night and found that I did.  But not enough time to do anything about it.

Share

How to find a lost manuscript of Eusebius

The lost manuscript of the full text of Eusebius’ Gospel problems and solutions was last seen in Sicily five centuries ago.  But it could quite possibly still be there.

It might be nice to search for Sicilian mss.  I was thinking about it last night.  We have a couple of clues.  Latino Latini writes that Sirleto had seen the ms. in Sicily.
 
1.  We need to work out what Cardinal Sirleto was doing in Sicily, and where he was doing it.  A study of his life should provide clues, and possibly his correspondence is extant (published would be nice, but improbable).  This might tell us where he found the ms.
 
2.  We need to work out what collections of Greek mss exist in Sicily, and also which were taken elsewhere (to Naples? to Spain?)  An enquiry of specialists like N.G.Wilson should provide clues.  Are there Greek abbeys there?
 
3.  We know (how) that Aurispa sent a shipment of Greek patristic mss from Constantinople to Sicily a century earlier.  Why to Sicily?  Where to?  Where might they have ended up?  Is this one?
 
Once we know the answers to these, and have a list of search sites, then it becomes a question of looking in catalogues, and visiting collections.
 
Might be an interesting project!
Share

End-titles in Greek verse

An email brings me word of a new publication by F. Schironi on the ends of books and the titles that appeared there, mainly connected with Greek poetry.

A systematic and chronoloical investigation into the nature and development of end-titles in papyrus rolls and codices of hexameter poetry from the III century BC through the VI century AD. The bulk of the evidence for presentation of hexametric verse derives from Homeric papyri (51 papyrus copies), although Hesiod’s Theogony, Works & Days, and Shield(two), and Oppian’s Halieutica likewise supply data (one). For comparative purposes the author also provides a sampling of end-titles in non-epic genres. The discussion of individual papyri and summation of the results are rich and informative. Includes bibliographical references, charts with comparative statistics, and pertinent indices. 

We’d probably better not ask what the price is — the blog is afraid to give it! — but there is a PDF summary available here.  I give the full url because the site can be a bit cranky:

http://quod.lib.umich.edu/cgi/p/pod/dod-idx?c=icp;idno=7523866.0025.179

Book-Ends and Book-Layout in Papyri with Hexametric Poetry – Francesca Schironi

The present article is a very brief summary of a monograph I have completed which consists of an analysis of the way ancient manuscripts (rolls and codices) containing hexametric poetry mark book-ends.   I have addressed two main questions: 1) if and how these manuscripts mark the end of books and  how end-marks change over time, especially with the adoption of the new format of the codex; and 2)  how epic poems in rolls and codices were arranged, in particular whether, after the end of one epic book,  another book followed and, if so, where it was placed, i.e. in the same column (or page) or in the next one.

The present analysis allows us to identify some clear patterns and to understand the way ancient manuscripts containing epic and above all Homeric poetry marked the end of books and organized their content over a period of time ranging from the 3rd century BC to the 6th century AD.

The paragraphos was one of the signs used to mark the end of a book and it consisted of a line at the left margin stretching under the first letters of the last line of the book. This line was used to separate visually the last line of a book from the first line of the next book. … The papyri in our data set prove that the common claim that Ptolemaic papyri used to have the entire poems written continuously in one, very long roll without distinguishing one book from another is false.  … All the codices available to us have an end-title. This is normally in the full form of the genitive of the name of the poem, followed by the letter designative of the book which has reached the end.  

It is very good news that this summary paper exists, so that thereby this intricate subject may reach a wider audience.  It indicates that the monograph must be a work of considerable interest and precision, and I sincerely hope the conclusions are taken seriously and not merely forgotten.

Now what about a similar study on prose texts?

Share

New Mithras frescoes in Syria

Mike Aquilina sends me word of an exciting find in Syria:

Syrian Archaeologists: Rare 3rd Century Frescos Undergoing Restoration at Hama Museum 
By H. Sabbagh     

Syria (Hama) – A group of experts from Poland are currently working to restore a number of rare frescos dating back to the 3rd century AD at the Hama Museum laboratory.

According to Director of the Hama Archaeology Directorate Abdelkader Ferzat, the frescos are murals that came from the temple of Mithras in the site of Horta hill in Apamea.

Ferzat said that the frescos were found in previous excavation seasons and were transported to Hama Museum along with their fragments and broken pieces where they were preserved for the purpose of studying and restoring them later.

He said that the Polish experts are currently using special techniques to repait and restore the frescos, which will be displayed later in the museum.

And look at these gorgeous colour images!

Syria fresco image of Mithras in a tauroctony

The main figure to the left is Cautes, the torchbearer.  The figure with the radiate crown must be Sol.  Mithras himself is holding a golden arrow — a sun-beam.  Damage has obliterated the bull.

I hope there are more images of this.  The vibrant colours make such a change from those cold white sculptures that we all know.

Share

Did the Romans believe their myths?

Blogger N.S.Gill is apparently asked some version of this interesting question often enough that she has compiled an FAQ on it.  She writes:

Almost every week I simplify a welter of contradictory stories for the Myth Monday.  … Some readers ask how the ancients reconciled seemingly unrelated versions of the same event.

Historian Charles King (The Organization of Roman Religious Beliefs, by Charles King; Classical Antiquity, (Oct. 2003), pp. 275-312.) provides insights into how the ancient Roman polytheistic, pagan religion worked that make sense to me, so I’ve extracted ideas from his 39-page article into an FAQ – Did the Romans Believe Their Myths?

I imagine the question arises from people used to the Christian approach to life, where beliefs determine behaviour and worship. 

But I have read that the reverse was the case in paganism.  It didn’t matter what you thought personally — who cared? So long as the right rituals were carried out, the sun would come up in the morning.  Temples didn’t gather congregations; they were more about doing things like sacrifices.

In a sense an ancient temple was more like a nuclear power plant than a church.  It doesn’t matter whether you believe in physics in the former; only what you do.

I wonder if any ancient source actually says this?

Share

A new harvest of myths

Christmas is coming, and with it comes the annual flood of stale old stories cynically designed to cast doubt on whether Christmas is a Christian festival, and eagerly believed by those who feel that way inclined. 

The favourite “authority” for these folk is Wikipedia — once one of their friends has suitably amended it, of course. 

I discovered this morning that one of these gentry had rewritten the summary of the article on Sol Invictus to tell various falsehoods about Sol Invictus being derived from Mithras.  Charmingly, the fraudster had tried to put some substance into his claims by pasting verbatim chunks of text and scholarly references from the Mithras article — material written by me, and of no conceivable relevance to Sol Invictus. 

Needless to say I deleted all this twaddle, but for how long?

While hunting around for some vaguely scholarly sources on the origins of Christmas, I came across Susan K. Roll, Towards the origins of Christmas.   There is a preview on Google books, here.  From this I formed a good opinion of the book and its referencing.  With luck I will find a PDF, and be able to use it as a source for correcting Wikipedia.

UPDATE: I found this Dilbert cartoon which somehow indicates the problem.

Share

Arabic gospel manuscripts

There is a two volume thesis by Hikmat Kashouh, The Arabic version of the gospel: the manuscripts and their families, accessible online at EthOS here (you have to create an account and do a rather silly ‘order’ but the PDF download is free, and the PDF is searchable).  This thesis was done in 2008 at the University of Birmingham; nice to see the Mingana collection getting some contemporary scholarly use!

The work looks like the starting point for some serious study of the Arabic translation of the gospels.  Interestingly it was sponsored by Christian groups the Langham Partnership International and St. John’s Church in Harbourne.

The thesis has developed into a book, being published by De Gruyter for a modest $377.  Details are here:

This book is concerned with the Arabic versions of the Gospels. It is an attempt to examine a substantial number of Arabic manuscripts which contain the continuous text of the canonical Gospels copied between the eighth and the nineteenth centuries and found in twenty-one different library collections in Europe and the Orient.

Following the introduction, Chapter Two presents the state of research from the middle of the nineteenth century to the present time. Chapter Three introduces and reflects on the two hundred plus manuscripts examined in this work. Chapters Four to Eight concentrate on grouping these manuscripts into twenty-four families and examining their Vorlagen (Greek, Syriac, Coptic and Latin). In order to examine the relationship between the families, phylogenetic software is used. Consequently, the manuscripts are grouped into seven different mega clusters or tribes. Finally the date of the first translation of the Gospels into Arabic is addressed and (a) provisional date(s) suggested based on the textual and linguistic analyses of the manuscripts.

The conclusion in Chapter Ten gives the overall contribution made by this thesis and also future avenues for the study of the Arabic versions of the Gospels.

Share